RickInOz

Over the past 5 or more years I’ve witnessed a strange phenomenon that seems to have passed unnoticed by most. An insidious deception perpetrated in the guise of benefaction.

It will come as no surprise that this post will be a criticism of the Apple Corporation. To see off any backlash against proponents of their products, I have no major issue with the hardware that carries their logo. On the whole products are stylish, functional and feature-rich. However I will raise a couple of concerns while we are on the subject. Firstly, I have an inherent dislike of any black-box device … in other words, one for which modification is not only discouraged but also actively suppressed. I’m sure for some the concept of a finished product that invites no end-user tinkering is nirvana, but for the techie this comes across as overly paternalistic. For example, there is no way to change the battery on an iPod without voiding the warranty … or paying Apple an extortionate sum to perform the routine task for you.

The second hardware concern was that they released the iPhone 4 to market with an easily exploited Achilles heel – that of the now infamous signal issue. That a new device had a problem is hardly unique, but given it so significantly impacted a core function … that of making phone calls … really should have been nipped in the bud prior to the official launch.

I could wax lyrical, but must get onto the meat of the issue, namely the modus operandi demonstrated by Apple. Fifteen or more years ago, I can remember using one of the early Mac models at school. At the time the Macintosh was regarded as revolutionary, as were those who used them. In the intervening years Apple managed to create an elitist aura with ownership being akin to membership of an enlightened fraternity.

At the same time, Microsoft was beleaguered with lawsuits, many of them entirely justified, attacking the protectionist strategies they employed to seize market share. They have been fined millions of dollars for the embedded integration of Internet Explorer into Windows products, yet when Apple hard-coded Safari into the iPhone and aggressively defended against any attempts to make competitors’ browsers available, it registered no attention. Although some 3rd-party browsers have subsequently appeared, they must use Safari’s layout engine (WebKit).

This leads me nicely onto another somewhat devious strategy adopted by Apple …. that software for their devices may only be obtained from them, with the threat of a loss of warranty for disobendiance. It is claimed that their benign motive is to ensure quality control, but the cynic in me thinks that they just want control. Imagine the hue and cry if Microsoft suddenly announced that the only software that would run on Windows were products that they either produced or approved. The EU lawyers wouldn’t be able to get their wigs on quick enough, yet somehow this behaviour by Apple has not raised concern.

Such a paternalistic attitude may sound beneficent but stifles development and is hence anti-competitive. That the ubiquitous Flash Player still isn’t permitted to run on the iPhone is another symptom of this. Again, Apple claim they are acting in the best interests of the owner by preventing a potential security catastrophe from running on their devices. That many other computing platforms (including Mac desktops) run Flash without many serious problems must not be relevant. The situation wouldn’t be quite so deleterious if Apple actually provided an alternative, but they have not. Which leaves the net result that iPhones cannot functionally utilise any website that has majority Flash content. A somewhat strange stance, given that the iPhone is supposed to be a full web integrated device.

Before I wrap up my last charge is against the spectre of the “Cult of Apple”. An unshakeable superior smugness adopted by some Apple owners. Few other possessions seem to spur owners into berating people who favour alternatives. If not for the tangibility of the focus, it could easily be viewed as akin to religious fever. All of which, no doubt, encouraged by the high priest Steve Jobs. He deserves credit for spearheading a business that has mimicked some of the more questionable strategies of it’s biggest rival, while simultaneously maintaining a whiter-than-white reputation. To paraphrase Baudelaire: The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn’t exist.

This post was induced by the recent finding by the Librarian of Congress in the US allowing jail-breaking of the iPhone. Unsurprisingly, vigorously opposed by Apple with many claims of doomsday proportions. However, EFF’s counsel, Fred von Lohmann, put it best: “I have a Toyota. Toyota would, of course, prefer that I use nothing but authentic Toyota parts and Toyota dealers for service, and that they would also prefer that I not modify my Toyota in ways that might be dangerous to me. I appreciate all that, but it is my automobile at the end of the day.”

Not just random letters but rather a set of abbreviations that all mean effectively the same thing. And worth asking anyone engaged in a professional arena whether they participate too.

They, respectively, stand for Maintenance of Professional Standards, Continuing Professional Development and Continuing Medical Education. The upshot being that it is not enough for someone to complete their training and then stagnate for the following 30 or more years of their working life. In any rapidly evolving field, new innovations and discoveries become mainstream. Only by remaining constantly up-to-date can we all deliver an optimal level of care.

To this end all colleges and registration boards insist that, not only do we undertake ongoing education, but also demonstrate evidence to that effect. What qualifies as MOPS, CPD or CME is rather vague and it is possible to score points just by reading journals and professional websites. Attendance at courses and conferences is the easiest method, hence why I recently went up to the Gold Coast to learn how to do basic echocardiography.

Another important aspect is Clinical Governance aka Quality Improvement aka Quality Assurance. All buzzwords for ensuring that standards are either met or surpassed. We are also required to show involvement in some audit process to beneficial effect.

All of this may sound like more nuisance than boon, and to some degree that is the case. But, the underlying aim is to ensure that we are not allowed to just coast through the remainder of our careers. Having recently finished my training and now at the beginning of the comfort zone, I am cognisant of the risk of not getting involved sooner rather than later. Especially given the carrot and stick approach taken by our supervisors … emphasis on the stick.

… but none for execution. The accolades go to Adelaide City Council, and their equivalents around the metropolitan area.

Over the past few years they have been slowly expanding the cycle lane network around the city. On the face of it, the project deserves praise. Cyclists occupy little space on the road, produce a fraction of the pollution of an internal combustion engine. And, most importantly, every bike rider means one less car hence less congestion. The main deterrent is the stark vulnerability and inevitable hospital admission during any tangle with a vehicle.

So, you might have thought that cyclists should be protected from other road traffic. This has clearly also occurred to many city councils around the world, especially in Northern Europe, who have laid out logical and well-designed networks to ensure pedal-pushers can get to work safely in the morning. But, not so here in Adelaide.

The disparity between enthusiasm and competence is exemplified by the hamfisted manner in which cycle lanes are set out. For example, on wide, open roads on which bikes and cars successfully co-existed previously they have helpfully painted in lines pointing out where the cyclists should go. Utterly pointless due to the sheer amount of road-space making the need for separation unnecessary. Then, on narrow roads, or at choke points or junctions, in other words any point at which cyclists need protection the most, these cycle lanes abruptly end. Leaving us with a choice of committing the felony of cycling on the pavement or literally taking your life in your hands by mingling with heavy traffic.

The situation isn’t helped by a sinister prevailing attitude amongst drivers here who see cyclists as a malignant and unwelcome presence, rather than a fellow road-user to be cooperated with.

So, the council’s heart may be in the right place, and I applaud the spirit of their intention, but they really need to get cyclists to design cycle lanes rather than the current crusty civil-servant …. to whom “cycle” is a description of a never-ending bureaucratic exercise …. entrusted with the role. That a steady road-toll mounts should galvanise more effective action more urgently …. as I don’t want to be next.

At long last … and with very little fanfare … at least no more than the “new email alert” sound on my laptop …. my permanent residency has been granted.

So, while still a filthy immigrant, I am at now at least an acceptable one. The new financial year ticked over and I was pretty much first in line amongst the annual migration quota. And all with surprisingly little resistance. At the very least we were expecting to be asked for more documentation or even to an interview. All that time we spent getting our stories straight was for nowt.

But obviously this comes as a welcome relief and with a few notable benefits. Firstly my eligibility for jobs is better as Australia (quite rightly) upholds the principle of nepotism. If only the UK had the same attitude then I wouldn’t have needed to come out here …. but, naturally, have no regrets whatsoever. The other significant advantage will be full Medicare (the Australian equivalent of the NHS) entitlement. So now I can save a small fortune by cancelling the extortionate rates charged to foreigners for private medical insurance.

In the next year or two I will likely apply for full citizenship as that would make life even easier. But for the time-being it is a good feeling knowing that I don’t have to go through the rigmarole of repeated visa applications every couple of years …. with the accompanying unwelcome blood tests and x-rays.

And the many other promises by Ph.D … or so I hoped … but unfortunately will now have to.

A circumlocutory tactic to gently break the news that we won’t be able to return for our planned holiday to the UK this year. For reasons beyond our control we can’t afford to leave Adelaide. I won’t go into detail right now, but suffice it to say that we didn’t make this decision lightly.

So, with many apologies for the disruption, please rebook us for the same time next year.

… is just the oncoming train.

But not today. All the paperwork, red tape and painfully complex recognition pathways I have been grumbling about for the past 6 months or more have finally paid off. It’s been a pretty arduous route and presented many hurdles. Some of them seemed frankly baffling, but there was no option other than to meet the various requirements.

The result is that I have finally been accepted as a fully-fledged member of the medical fraternity. The local board have granted me both Full Registration and Specialist Status. The combination allows me to work as a consultant if I want to.

All I now need is a job …. ah yes, just that small detail. And another one of those hurdles. Life seems to have a seemingly endless supply.

Australia really has the right attitude when it comes to public holidays. Not only does the entire nation come to a halt for a horse race, but also for the Queen’s Official Birthday.

I think there’s a certain irony that a country that held a referendum on dropping the monarch as head of state continues to celebrate their birthday with a day off, yet the country that the monarch actually sits in, doesn’t. Sounds to me like the Aussies got it right, and likely a significant argument for keeping the Queen’s head on the currency.

… and what does it reference?

For Australians this is apparently common knowledge, but it was news to me. Even more so when a member of the public stood up and performed this song by heart with extraordinary gusto.

Last night, as something a little different, we went to see the RockWiz touring show. Normally a television music quiz, it adopts a very different style to the usual quick-fire back-and-forth. Instead, they invite Australian (and occasionally, international) talent to sit alongside normal contestants. Live music forms a significant aspect of the show with a house band comprised of well-known names.

Most of the subject material went way over my head, including the titular references, but it was still entertaining beyond expectations. Much self-referential humour bounced around and the audience were invited to participate on numerous instances. Very different to the usual passive attendance. So, the night saw us holler, sing and applaud until the final curtain. Never have I had so much fun while knowing so little.

A reference to American sub-culture for interest. And a lead in to another rant.

Recently we took the opportunity to watch Sacha Baron Cohen’s most recent offering Brüno. I’ll summarise by saying it was 2 hours of my life I want back. “Abysmally atrociously abhorrent” would also come close.

For the benefit of those who haven’t, nor shouldn’t, watch this abomination, the basic premise is of a caricature (this time the aforementioned Brüno, but Borat and Ali G were cut from similar cloth) who seeks to push the boundaries of common decency in an effort to embarrass, or humiliate, real people. That those subject are unwitting and unaware participants would be bad enough. After all, such glee at other’s discomfort is the type of practical joke that even children have graduated beyond. But Cohen has pulled an even nastier trick. No longer is it enough just to laugh while they cringe, but this time we have been invited to find humour while their sensibilities are pushed to breaking point.

Increasingly, taboo has been challenged. What is considered acceptable by today’s standards would, very likely, have been distinctly risqué no more than a few decades ago. Swear words have ceased to have the impact they once had. The bawdy comedies of the 70s now give way to sexual openness and a rewriting of film classifications. So, movie producers have to raise the bar ever higher if they want to push their audience’s “thrill button”. It may also be that Gen Y is so struck by apathy that they simply can’t be shocked any more.

Cohen must have realised this as the very purpose of his film seems to be to relish in those who are still thin-skinned. No surprise then, that his last two films have depended on the bigotry and insular attitudes of the American Deep South. Even the Top Gear producers have made the most of this accessible, yet exploitable society.

In other words, the film is simply about deliberately causing offence … for the sake of causing offence. This time the aim is not to target the audience, nor challenge their comfort level. But instead, there is clearly a deliberate intent to provoke the film’s subjects and revel in their uncomfortable and unfettered reactions. Then, those responses are presented in a manner aimed to ridicule. And, in so doing, the film hits rock bottom.

What does it say about a film producer that he has to resort to puerile taunting of those guaranteed to take the bait. There was nothing cerebral nor articulate in the film. I’d even challenge whether it could be seen as a subtle commentary on the prevalence of prejudice still extant in some parts of the world. Instead, it’s merely a cheaply made exploitation flick aimed at the type of moron who thinks it’s funny to belittle the value set of others.

For shame, Mr Cohen, for shame.

…. laughs hardest. Or so the saying goes. Right now I’m having an ironic chuckle.

The United Kingdom seems to be going down the toilet in many ways lately. We’ve heard reports of businesses going under, multinationals pulling out, growing unemployment, cuts to government spending, a slump in the housing market and the inevitable national pessimism.

Now added to that is the recent news that the junior doctor body may be short by as many as 3000 posts nationwide. Some areas are harder hit than others, but it seems that there is a widespread disparity between demand and supply.

But all of this could have been avoided. Firstly, about 4 years ago, the incumbent government changed the rules on medical immigration. No longer were those from Commonwealth countries welcomed as the rules changed to favour the expected mass-migration of doctors from the newly expanded European Union. This, of course, back-fired badly as the influx was no where near as large as expected, and those who did come often failed to match expectations. Standards had traditionally been fairly high as only the wealthy from India could afford to make it to the UK. It wasn’t coincidence that these doctors from wealthy families had also had the best education, and spoke the best English. The latter reinforced by the requirement to pass a language competency test prior to arrival.

But our European colleagues didn’t have these restrictions placed on them, and more than a few had to be sent packing when either their clinical aptitude or command of English failed to meet the required grade. Some hasty back-pedalling was attempted but word had already got around and Indian doctors were no longer coming.

The other aspect is the failed MMC project that was aimed to revolutionise and streamline medical training. Three years on and it has not only been scrapped, but most deaneries have returned to the older, yet more efficient, system. Unfortunately the damage has already been done, and maybe even irreparably so. Many colleagues, like me, struggled to find work during the shambolic implementation process. They, like me, left the UK hoping to find better fortune elsewhere. And many, like me, have found opportunity and success where they settled.

So, another legacy of the late Labour government is the undermining of the medical profession. They not only deterred good doctors coming to plug existing holes but, most worryingly, drove off some of their home-grown workforce. The net result, as shown in the papers, is no surprise whatsoever.

Perhaps I should return to help bolster the flagging middle-grade out of a sense of duty. But why should I? The system rejected me at a time when I needed to further my career the most. Now, I’m at the same stage, only more senior, and stand a real chance of making specialist here with the accompanying full-time, indefinite contract. Would I go back to uncertainty and demotion? Not in a million years.

So, sorry NHS, but you’ll have to manage without me.